I am finding it hard to comprehend people's obsession and reasoning behind having a strong tail even at expense of leaving out better bowlers... (if the the top and middle order struggles against spin, then in all likelihood so will the tail)

I keep hearing people (experts too) say that playing both Finn (if fit) and Monty in the next game would gravely weaken their batting unit. Do they, however, realize how much of a difference this move could make to their bowling. For example, although they'd likely lose 30-40 runs playing the former two, they may manage to restrict India for 100+ fewer runs than with Broad and Bresnan instead. The positive impacts of the bowling performance may even carry into the batting. Hence, the potential gains from bowling clearly outweigh the additional runs that Broad and Bresnan would probably add to the tally. (It's not like they are in a good batting form either tbf)

If I were in charge, I'd play the 4 best bowlers for the conditions given, and not compromise bowling to strengthen the tail-end batting, especially considering that they are now 1-0 behind and they must take 20 wickets to win.

Play the best bowlers and play the best batsmen to give yourself the best shot at a competetitive performance, easy. Take out Patel too if he's not a better batting alternative to Morgan and co..

Well done India. The pitch was a slow dry powderflake and had it been Sri Lanka instead of England, it would have been a boring draw. It was a good innings from Cook but overwhelmingly overshadowed by Pujara's classic double ton. What an exciting prospect he is!

lol.. seems suddenly it is a sin to expect umpires to be any good without having to resort to DRS..

We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

In the end, I think it's so utterly, incomprehensibly boring. There is so much context behind each innings of cricket that dissecting statistics into these small samples is just worthless. No-one has ever been faced with the same situation in which they come out to bat as someone else. Ever.

Overrated captain and a pretty poor keeper tbh isn't worth his place in the Indian side, Saha looked a much tidier keeper in Aus.

Still stand by that I think Kohli should be captaining India, bit Ganguly like in attitude which is what I think they need.

India have won 20, lost 10 and drawn 10 out of 40 played under Dhoni’s leadership – success % 50.00. Only Sourav Ganguly (21) has posted more Test victories for India than Dhoni. Add to that two World Cups and the distinction of taking his team to World no.1 in test cricket. All these with a bowler and a half apparently.

lol.. seems suddenly it is a sin to expect umpires to be any good without having to resort to DRS..

stop digging posts from half a million hours ago just to stir the pot ffs. you always do this. that and your other pet hobby of not arguing against what is actually being said.

Originally Posted by Athlai

Jeets doesn't really deserve to be bowling.

Originally Posted by Athlai

Well yeah Tendy is probably better than Bradman, but Bradman was 70 years ago, if he grew up in the modern era he'd still easily be the best. Though he wasn't, can understand the argument for Tendy even though I don't agree.